NICEIC Certification Scheme 2391 V NICEIC - Whats the point in 2391??

[Ian1981]

Not quite true. NICEIC has domestic installer & approved contractor, whereas Elecsa's has just approved contractor, in their 'Part P' scheme. I think the fees for the domestic installer & Elecsa approved contractor are similar, whereas NIC approved contractor is some more ££'s.

By the way on another subject, I did my electrical apprenticeship in the late 60's, and it was really hard. Not like easy peezy ones that turned up later. I have a wealth of knowledge, that simply surpasses all those that have done their training in the last few years. There's nothing you can tell me about anything, electrically speaking. I don't know why some people bother trying to learn how to be an electrician, 'cos they are on loosing wicket compared to me.

As Ali G would say
Respect!!!

 

[westward10]

If your boss said ‘“hey if I pay for you to do the 2391 will you do it “ would you still not consider it tho?
Might learn something

Maybe and he probably would.

 

[Noaksie]

All the trade bidies "competent persons schemes" are more about membership fees than checking competence unfortunately. The original C&G 2391 inspection and testing exam was not an open book exam. It had a bad name due to the low pass rate. However it did sort the men from the boys!
I passed the original 2391 exam. It was hard work but in my view worthwhile. Going through the motions of the testing not really understanding the tests being carried out is a waste of time.
My view is to test and sign off works as compliant with the regs. Should require passing this exam. I have heard the new version is watered down which is a retrograde step in my opinion.

 

[Noaksie]

All the trade bidies "competent persons schemes" are more about membership fees than checking competence unfortunately. The original C&G 2391 inspection and testing exam was not an open book exam. It had a bad name due to the low pass rate. However it did sort the men from the boys!
I passed the original 2391 exam. It was hard work but in my view worthwhile. Going through the motions of the testing not really understanding the tests being carried out is a waste of time.
My view is to test and sign off works as compliant with the regs. Should require passing this exam. I have heard the new version is watered down which is a retrograde step in my opinion.

 

[Noaksie]

All the trade bidies "competent persons schemes" are more about membership fees than checking competence unfortunately. The original C&G 2391 inspection and testing exam was not an open book exam. It had a bad name due to the low pass rate. However it did sort the men from the boys!
I passed the original 2391 exam. It was hard work but in my view worthwhile. Going through the motions of the testing not really understanding the tests being carried out is a waste of time.
My view is to test and sign off works as compliant with the regs. Should require passing this exam. I have heard the new version is watered down which is a retrograde step in my opinion.

 

[Pete999]

Hi Guys,

A debate at work and im slightly confused and thought maybe someone here may shed some light.

What is the point in doing your 2391 Testing course? Apparently to be NIC Registered you do not need to have 2391 Inspection & Testing & You are able to sign work off.
However if you have your 2391 you are still unable to sign work off as your are not NIC Registered?

It seems all a bit backward if you ask me how can you be unqualified and sign work off? but maybe there is truth in what i am being told.

If so why do the 2391 when you could sign up to NIC for less then half the price.

Thanks Guys

Another retrograde scheme now 2391 has been dumbed down by the Part P CPS IMO

 

[Midwest]

All the trade bidies "competent persons schemes" are more about membership fees than checking competence unfortunately. The original C&G 2391 inspection and testing exam was not an open book exam. It had a bad name due to the low pass rate. However it did sort the men from the boys!
I passed the original 2391 exam. It was hard work but in my view worthwhile. Going through the motions of the testing not really understanding the tests being carried out is a waste of time.
My view is to test and sign off works as compliant with the regs. Should require passing this exam. I have heard the new version is watered down which is a retrograde step in my opinion.

Didn't teach just to hit the button once though, did it

 

[Dillb]

Another retrograde scheme now 2391 has been dumbed down by the Part P CPS IMO

Didnt one of the scams (sorry I must stop calling them that) I mean schemes even run their own "2391" course at one time? If memory serves me correctly it was NAPIT

 

[Pete999]

Don't apologise Mate SCAMS is the right description. 2391 used to be a worthwhile course, now though I'm not so sure!

 

[Midwest]

I expect those taking the newer 2391, might have a different opinion to those expressed.

I took O-Levels when I was at school. Replaced by the much easier less testing GCSE's.

That doesn't mean there's loads of thicko's out there now, does it.

 

[westward10]

Things have definitely been watered down, I never did the 2391 but got a distinction in the 2400. You can only pass what is put in front of you but the biggest failing is people sitting these exams without supplementing it with practical experience from experienced people, that is when you start learning.

 

[Pete999]

I expect those taking the newer 2391, might have a different opinion to those expressed.

I took O-Levels when I was at school. Replaced by the much easier less testing GCSE's.

That doesn't mean there's loads of thicko's out there now, does it.

Quite right, but the dumb down make any exam easier to pass regardless of what exam, it doesn't make the examinees any dumber as you say, but you are correct.

 

[Dillb]

I expect those taking the newer 2391, might have a different opinion to those expressed.

I took O-Levels when I was at school. Replaced by the much easier less testing GCSE's.

That doesn't mean there's loads of thicko's out there now, does it.

You can only do whats in front of you, the problem is there will be more people with the 2391 claiming they are competant testers when there not leading to a saturation of the market. You only have to look at I&T jobs and see they pay a pittance per circuit tested, but those will get filled by those who know no better.

 

[westward10]

I always considered the 2391 to be a dumbed down version of the 2400.

 

[Midwest]

You can only do whats in front of you, the problem is there will be more people with the 2391 claiming they are competant testers when there not leading to a saturation of the market. You only have to look at I&T jobs and see they pay a pittance per circuit tested, but those will get filled by those who know no better.

But in deference to your good self, you're not always going to be around to be testing to 2391. Someone else will take up the baton.

I'll expect them to be moaning about those new young thrusters in 30 years from now.